|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
03 giu 2002 PENA MORTE: USA; L'AVVOCATO DORMIVA, REVOCATA LA CONDANNA
Adesso, tocchera' al Texas decidere se processare di nuovo Burdine o lasciarlo libero. Lo Stato del Texas s'opponeva alla revoca, sostenendo che la mancanza d'attenzione del difensore non comporta, di per se', un giudizio ingiusto. Burdine era stato condannato per avere ucciso a coltellate il suo amante gay, W.T. Wise, a Houston nel 1983. Burdine confesso' il delitto alla polizia, ma ora nega di avere ucciso Wise e afferma che a compiere il delitto e' stato qualcun altro, mentre lui cercava di impedirlo. Giurati e un cancelliere del tribunale hanno raccontato come l'avvocato d'ufficio di Burdine, Joe Cannon, abbia dormito per dieci minuti di fila a piu' riprese, durante il processo del 1984. La condanna a morte di Burdine fu sul punto di essere eseguita nel 1987, prima che un ordine di sospensione consentisse al condannato di avviare l'azione ora avallata dalla sentenza della Corte Suprema.
PENA MORTE: USA; AVVOCATO DORMIVA, CORTE FERMA IL BOIA SECONDO GIUDICI SUPREMI FU VIOLATO IL DIRITTO ALLA DIFESA (di Marco Bardazzi) NEW YORK, 3 GIU 2002 - Gli interrogativi che da tempo circolano all'interno della Corte Suprema degli Stati Uniti sulla Correttezza dei processi sfociati in una condanna a morte sono sfociati in una sentenza che segna un precedente storico. Il Texas dovra' processare di nuovo o mettere in liberta' un condannato il cui avvocato d'ufficio si concedeva lunghi sonnellini durante il processo di primo grado. Il caso di Calvine Burdine, 48 anni, che nel 1987 era arrivato a pochi minuti dall'esecuzione prima che la giustizia fermasse il boia, ha spinto la Corte Suprema a scendere su un terreno che sta molto a cuore ad almeno un paio tra i nove membri della massima istituzione giudiziaria americana: garantire il diritto alla difesa e un processo corretto ad ogni imputato, anche a chi non puo' permettersi i legali di celebri studi. Nel 1984, quando Burdine era comparso di fronte ad una corte a Houston, non aveva ricevuto certo il miglior difensore d' ufficio possibile. L'avvocato Joe Cannon, secondo quanto hanno testimoniato varie fonti e come ha riconosciuto anche lo stato del Texas, durante il processo si addormento' almeno una decina di volte, in alcuni casi ronfando indisturbato per 10 minuti di seguito. Burdine era imputato per l'omicidio nel 1983 del suo amante gay, W.T. 'Dub' Wise, ucciso a coltellate perche' - cosi' racconto' l'imputato - voleva costringerlo a prostituirsi per guadagnare soldi per entrambi. Burdine in seguito ha ritrattato l'autoaccusa, sostenendo che fu una terza persona ad uccidere Wise. Ma cio' che ha reso subito il suo caso simbolico per gli oppositori della pena di morte e per chi, tra i sostenitori, chiede comunque piu' garanzie, e' stata la vicenda dell'avvocato appisolato. Il procuratore del Texas Julie Parsley, di fronte alla Corte Suprema, ha ammesso che Cannon era stato ''ripetutamente inconscio'' durante il processo, ma ha sostenuto che questo non ha influenzato l'esito del dibattimento. L'alta corte di Washington, dove il caso Burdine e' arrivato al termine di un lungo iter giudiziario che lo ha visto rimbalzare per anni da una corte all'altra, si e' pronunciata senza commenti ne' pareri di dissenso, limitandosi a respingere l'appello del Texas che cercava di ottenere il via libera per l'esecuzione. Le autorita' texane hanno adesso la possibilita' di celebrare un nuovo processo per Burdine, oppure rinunciare a perseguire oltre il caso: in questo caso, il detenuto tornerebbe in liberta'. L'avvocato Cannon frattempo e' morto, ma la sua vicenda potrebbe avere ora ripercussioni su altri casi discussi che chiamano in causa il diritto costituzionale alla difesa. Tra questi, quelli di due condannati a morte dell'Arizona - uno dei quali e' l'italo-americano Richard Rossi - che hanno convinto una corte d'appello federale a valutare se il loro processo sia stato corretto, dal momento che a condannarli e' stato un giudice che andava in aula sotto l'effetto della marijuana ed e' stato poi cacciato dall'incarico per la sua dipendenza dagli stupefacenti. Adnkronos - DPA 03 giu 2002 PENA DI MORTE: USA, L'AVVOCATO DORMIVA, ANNULLATA SENTENZA Washington, Un uomo condannato a morte in Texas verra' scarcerato o riprocessato perche' il suo avvocato d'ufficio si era addormentato in aula piu' volte durante il processo, e non aveva garantito il suo diritto alla difesa. E' questo l'effetto della decisione presa oggi dalla Corte Suprema degli Stati Uniti sul caso di Calvin Jerold Burdine, 48 anni, condannato nel 1984 alla pena capitale con l'accusa di aver ucciso il suo compagno gay. Burdine, la cui esecuzione fu sospesa all'ultimo minuto nel 1987, si e' battuto in questi anni per dimostare che il processo non fu equo. La corte federale d'appello gli aveva dato ragione, ma lo stato del Texas ha presentato ricorso davanti alla Corte Suprema. Quest'ultima ha stabilito oggi di respingere il ricorso, e ora spettera' alle autorita' texane decidere se ricominciare da capo il processo o mandare in liberta' Burdine.
L'avvocato dormiva, pena di morte sospesa La Corte suprema Usa rimanda il caso in Texas 3 giugno 2002 WASHINGTON - Il suo avvocato dormiva al processo, concluso con una sentenza di morte. E ora Calvin Jerold Burdine, condannato alla pena capitale nel 1984 in Texas per omicidio, ha ottenuto un nuovo processo. Anzi, potrebbe addirittura uscire subito di prigione. La decisione che salva, almeno per ora, la vita di Burdine � arrivata luned� dalla Corte Suprema degli Stati Uniti. I giudici supremi hanno sentenziato che l'uomo non ha potuto godere del diritto a una piena difesa perch� il suo legale, nominato d'ufficio, dormiva in aula. Joe Cannon dormiva letteralmente: anche dieci minuti di fila, come hanno testimoniato diversi giurati e il cancelliere. Burdine aveva confessato alla polizia di aver commesso l'omicidio del suo amante, avvenuto a Houston nel 1983. In seguito ha ritrattato completamente. Ha gi� sfiorato l'esecuzione nel 1987, ottenendo un rinvio quando ormai era nella camera della morte. Poi ha perso numerosi appelli fino a quando un tribunale federale non gli ha dato ragione, riconoscendo che il sonno del suo avvocato lo aveva privato di una difesa efficace. Lo stato del Texas ha portato il proprio ricorso contro questa sentenza alla Corte Suprema, che ha deciso in favore del condannato. La decisione dei giudici supremi non ha mancato di suscitare una controversia. Pochi giorni prima infatti la Corte aveva deciso del tutto diversamente nel caso assai simile di un condannato a morte del Tennessee, il quale sosteneva l'inadeguatezza del suo legale. In quell'occasione i giudici di Washington avevano stabilito che la condanna restava, non essendo abbastanza grave la sostenuta incompetenza dell'avvocato. Nel caso di Burdine poi ha creato stupore la decisione di rigettare immediatamente la posizione dello stato del Texas, invece di rimandare tutto il caso alla corte d'appello da cui proveniva, perch� venisse esaminato nuovamente. La questione pi� ampia della posizione della Corte Suprema sulla pena di morte, comunque, va avanti: almeno due giudici su nove hanno espresso, anche se non in delle sentenze, dubbi sulla qualit� di molti avvocati d'ufficio impiegati nei processi per reati capitali.
TEXAS: Death Row Inmate Whose Lawyer Slept at Trial Gets New Trial A Texas death row inmate whose lawyer slept for long portions of his murder trial will either win freedom or a new trial, after the Supreme Court refused to intervene Monday. The high court rejected an appeal from Texas authorities, who argued that the lawyer's inattention did not necessarily equal an unfair trial. The Supreme Court's action means that Texas must choose whether to retry Calvin Jerold Burdine or set him free. Burdine was convicted of stabbing to death his gay lover, W.T. Wise, at the Houston trailer they shared in 1983. Burdine confessed to police, but now denies killing Wise. He claims an accomplice actually killed Wise, while Burdine tried to talk him out of it. Jurors and a court clerk later described how court-appointed lawyer Joe Cannon slept for up to 10 minutes at a time during the 1984 trial, and the separate sentencing phase that followed. Burdine was sentenced to death. Burdine came within moments of execution in 1987 before receiving a court-ordered reprieve. Cannon, who has since died, denied falling asleep. Burdine lost several rounds of appeals before a federal court agreed that Cannons performance violated Burdines constitutional right to an effective lawyer. A federal appeals court panel first reversed that finding in a highly criticized ruling in 2000. The full appeals court then agreed to hear the case, and agreed with the 1st court that Burdine did not get a fair chance to defend himself. Texas' appeal to the Supreme Court claimed that the ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals creates a conflict among federal appeals courts about what constitutes unacceptable lawyer conduct. The Supreme Court sat on the case for months, apparently because it had agreed to hear a case that raised similar issues about the right of appeal when a death row inmate claims his lawyer was inadequate. Last week, the court ruled against the Tennessee inmate involved in the other case. The court majority found his lawyers performance was not bad enough to justify an exception to strict rules intended to shorten death row appeals. It was not clear Monday why the court acted as it did in Burdine's case. Instead of sending the case back to the appeals court for reconsideration in light of the Tennessee case, the high court rejected Texas appeal outright. The Supreme Court has not yet taken a case that asks the broader question of what to do about underprepared or overworked death penalty lawyers. Away from the court, 2 justices have expressed strong reservations about the quality of legal help that some inmates receive.
Victory for Sleeping Lawyer's Client WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court delivered a victory Monday to a death row inmate who said his lawyer snoozed through much of his trial, a possible prelude to broader examination of the quality of legal help available to poor defendants facing the death penalty. The high court refused a request from Texas authorities, who wanted the court to reinstate a murder conviction and death sentence against Calvin Jerold Burdine, who claimed that his court-appointed lawyer slept for up to 10 minutes at a time during crucial phases of the 1984 trial. ``The Supreme Court has served justice today by finding it unacceptable that an attorney should flagrantly nap during a trial in which a man's life is at stake,'' said Sue Gunawardena-Vaughn, director of Amnesty International's Program to Abolish the Death Penalty. The case now returns to Texas, where authorities must decide whether to retry Burdine or set him free. The state had argued that Burdine could not show his trial would have come out differently if his lawyer had stayed awake. While not a ruling on the merits of Burdine's claim, the high court's action may be a sign that some justices remain attuned to longstanding complaints that overworked or underprepared lawyers are too often assigned to represent murder suspects too poor to hire a lawyer of their choice. The Constitution guarantees the right to a lawyer, and the Supreme Court has previously said that means the right to an effective lawyer. Away from court, two justices have discussed concerns about poor legal representation in death row cases. But those worries so far have not played out in the court's rule-making. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said last year that it may be time to require minimum standards for lawyers. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that among all the inmates who have asked the court for last-minute reprieves, she has never seen one who got really good legal help at trial. ``People who are well represented at trial do not get the death penalty,'' she said last year. The court heard two cases this term in which death row inmates claimed they had bad lawyers. The court ruled against the inmates both times, most recently in a case last week involving a Tennessee man whose lawyer skipped a closing argument to the jury. Earlier, the court sided against a convicted killer whose lawyer had previously represented the victim in an another case. Neither those cases nor the Burdine appeal squarely asked the question that seemed to trouble O'Connor and Ginsburg, however: What does being an effective lawyer mean when someone's life is in the balance? Burdine's victory Monday is not necessarily encouraging for other defendants in the long term, said Stephen Bright, a death penalty opponent at the Southern Center for Human Rights. ``The constitutional rule that comes out of this term is that courts should have very strong coffee available to defense lawyers,'' Bright said. ``If the lawyer stays awake (this year's decisions) suggest that any lawyer is going to be good enough for this Supreme Court. Only in the most dramatic and outrageous cases, such as a lawyer sleeping through the trial, is there going to be any relief given.'' Burdine was convicted of stabbing to death his gay lover, W.T. ``Dub'' Wise, at the Houston trailer they shared in 1983. Burdine confessed to police, but later recanted. He now claims an accomplice actually killed Wise, while Burdine tried to talk him out of it. After the trial, the jury foreman and a court clerk described how court-appointed lawyer Joe Cannon slept for up to 10 minutes at a time during the trial and sentencing phase. Cannon, who has since died, denied falling asleep. Burdine lost several rounds of appeals and survived six execution dates before a federal court agreed that Cannon's performance violated Burdine's constitutional right to an effective lawyer. A federal appeals court panel first reversed that finding in a highly criticized ruling in 2000. The full appeals court then agreed to hear the case, and agreed with the first court that Burdine did not get a fair chance to defend himself. The Supreme Court let that ruling stand.
Death Row Inmate Gets a New Chance Jun 3, 202 By ANNE GEARAN, WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court delivered a victory Monday to a death row inmate who said his lawyer snoozed through much of his trial, a possible prelude to broader examination of the quality of legal help available to poor defendants facing the death penalty. The high court refused a request from Texas authorities, who wanted the court to reinstate a murder conviction and death sentence against Calvin Jerold Burdine, who claimed that his court-appointed lawyer slept for up to 10 minutes at a time during crucial phases of the 1984 trial. "The Supreme Court has served justice today by finding it unacceptable that an attorney should flagrantly nap during a trial in which a man's life is at stake," said Sue Gunawardena-Vaughn, director of Amnesty International's Program to Abolish the Death Penalty. The case now returns to Texas, where authorities must decide whether to retry Burdine or set him free. The state had argued that Burdine could not show his trial would have come out differently if his lawyer had stayed awake. While not a ruling on the merits of Burdine's claim, the high court's action may be a sign that some justices remain attuned to longstanding complaints that overworked or underprepared lawyers are too often assigned to represent murder suspects too poor to hire a lawyer of their choice. The Constitution guarantees the right to a lawyer, and the Supreme Court has previously said that means the right to an effective lawyer. Away from court, two justices have discussed concerns about poor legal representation in death row cases. But those worries so far have not played out in the court's rule-making. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (news - web sites) said last year that it may be time to require minimum standards for lawyers. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (news - web sites) said that among all the inmates who have asked the court for last-minute reprieves, she has never seen one who got really good legal help at trial. "People who are well represented at trial do not get the death penalty," she said last year. The court heard two cases this term in which death row inmates claimed they had bad lawyers. The court ruled against the inmates both times, most recently in a case last week involving a Tennessee man whose lawyer skipped a closing argument to the jury. Earlier, the court sided against a convicted killer whose lawyer had previously represented the victim in an another case. Neither those cases nor the Burdine appeal squarely asked the question that seemed to trouble O'Connor and Ginsburg, however: What does being an effective lawyer mean when someone's life is in the balance? Burdine's victory Monday is not necessarily encouraging for other defendants in the long term, said Stephen Bright, a death penalty opponent at the Southern Center for Human Rights. "The constitutional rule that comes out of this term is that courts should have very strong coffee available to defense lawyers," Bright said. "If the lawyer stays awake (this year's decisions) suggest that any lawyer is going to be good enough for this Supreme Court. Only in the most dramatic and outrageous cases, such as a lawyer sleeping through the trial, is there going to be any relief given." Burdine was convicted of stabbing to death his gay lover, W.T. "Dub" Wise, at the Houston trailer they shared in 1983. Burdine confessed to police, but later recanted. He now claims an accomplice actually killed Wise, while Burdine tried to talk him out of it. After the trial, the jury foreman and a court clerk described how court-appointed lawyer Joe Cannon slept for up to 10 minutes at a time during the trial and sentencing phase. Cannon, who has since died, denied falling asleep. Burdine lost several rounds of appeals and survived six execution dates before a federal court agreed that Cannon's performance violated Burdine's constitutional right to an effective lawyer. A federal appeals court panel first reversed that finding in a highly criticized ruling in 2000. The full appeals court then agreed to hear the case, and agreed with the first court that Burdine did not get a fair chance to defend himself. The Supreme Court let that ruling stand. |
||||||||||||||||||||
the Community of Sant'Egidio
Abolitions, 
WASHINGTON, 03 GIU - La Corte Suprema degli Stati Uniti
ha oggi
